Translation Based on Ogden and Richard’s Semantic Triangle Theory
How the Idea Is Connected to Real-World Objects
Abstract
This paper aims to analyze the process of translators in translation based on semantic triangle theory in Indonesia. It parts of its intentions to provide some references for related researchers which focus on the theory of reference triangle as it is one of the important theories in Semantic field. The exploration of this study sees the reference triangle is a theory well known by the scholars for decades able to explain how words convey meaning. This study addressed that “the how” of this theory workings are like words that suggest ideas in the listener's mind. Which explains how the idea is connected to real-world objects. The triangle reference somehow continues to be used as a model for semiotic relationships into the 21st century, this theory also has several potential deficiencies that could limit its application. Which means that this theory still applicable to be used as a current meaning-framework in translation based semantic.
Downloads
References
Álvarez-Mosquera, P., & Marín-Gutiérrez, A. (2018). Implicit Language Attitudes toward Historically White Accents in the South African Context. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 37(2), 238-248. doi: 10.1177/ 0261927X17718349
Angelis, G. D. (2007). Third Or Additional Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Anhua, F. (2013 ). On Translation of Object Names Based on Semantic Triangle Theory. Journal of Nantong Textile Vocational Technology College, 4, 41-44.
Augustine, D. C. (2011). Semiotics for Beginners. from http://www. aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/S4B/sem02.html
Bauer, R. (2003). The cultural geography of colonial American literatures: Empire, travel, modernity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beeching, K. (2016). Pragmatic Markers in British English: Meaning in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bellés-Calvera, L. (2018). Teaching Music in English: A Content-Based Instruction Model in Secondary Education. Latin American Journal of Content & Language Integrated-Laclil, 11(1), 109–139.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative Research for Education: An Introduction to Theories and Methods. Boston: Pearson Allyn & Bacon.
Bowen, J. D., Winczewski, L. A., & Collins, N. L. (2017). Language Style Matching in Romantic Partners’ Conflict and Support Interactions. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 36(3), 263-286.
Bublitz, W., & Norrick, N. (2011). Foundations of Pragmatics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.
Burnett, H. (2019). Signalling games, sociolinguistic variation and the construction of style. Linguistics and Philosophy, 42(5), 419-450.
Cameron, D., Frazer, E., Harvey, P., Rampton, M. B. H., & Richardson, K. (2018). Researching Language: Issues of Power and Method. London: Routledge.
Chan, C. K., & Wong, H. Y. (2021). Students’ Perception of Written, Audio, Video and Face-to-face Reflective Approaches for Holistic Competency Development. Active Learning in Higher Education, 146978742110544., 0(0). doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874211054449
Hartman, R. R. K., & Strock, F. C. (1973). Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. London: Prentice Hall International. (UK), Ltd.
Liyuan, P., & Yuetian, X. (2009). Rectifying the Classic Semantic Triangle. Foreign Language Research, 4(1), 51-54.
Lyons, J. (1968). Introduction to theoretical linguistics. London: Cambridge University Press.
Noth, W. (1995). Handbook of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Ogden, C. K., & Richards, I. A. (1923). The Meaning of Meaning. Florida: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Sugiyono. (2007). Metode Penelitian Pendidikan. Bandung: Al Fabeta.
.png)
